<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Governor Otter doesn't seem to realize that we all benefit from Idaho Public Television regardless of if we watch it or not. IPTV is a community service that teaches children starting from a young age basic reading, writing, social, and math skills. This is particularly useful in helping children grow up enjoying learning, graduate high school, and become happy productive people. It is especially helpful to children and adults living in remote regions of the state with limited resources available. We all benefit from this, even if we don't have children, or watch programming on IPTV.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It also helps the general public be kept informed about the Idaho Legislature. Which should be a basic right as a taxpayer supporting the state.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>$1.7 million a year is only about $1 a person in Idaho. IPTV is probably the best dollar in taxes I pay in terms of what the state returns. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As much as I dislike taxes, I would rather pay an additional $2 a year then see IPTV be eliminated from the state budget.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Your Friend,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Donovan Arnold</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>--- On <B>Sat, 2/6/10, Tom Hansen <I><thansen@moscow.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Tom Hansen <thansen@moscow.com><BR>Subject: [Vision2020] Public TV Too Valuable for Idaho to Abandon<BR>To: "Moscow Vision 2020" <vision2020@moscow.com><BR>Date: Saturday, February 6, 2010, 2:13 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>Courtesy of today's (February 6, 2010) Spokesman-Review.<BR><BR>----------------------------------------------------<BR><BR>Public TV too valuable for Idaho to abandon<BR>The Spokesman-Review<BR><BR>Idaho Gov. Butch Otter’s proposal to end the subsidy for Idaho Public<BR>Television raises interesting theoretical questions: Is this something<BR>government should be funding? <SPAN>Couldn</SPAN>’t it be fully privatized?<BR><BR>Yes, it could be fully privatized, but it wouldn’t be the same. Before<BR>weighing whether to eliminate funding, the Legislature should first weigh<BR>what would be lost. One-fourth of IPTV’s operating budget comes from the<BR>state. Sixty-two percent of its budget is from private donations. IPTV<BR>already outpaces most of its peers in private fundraising. Some states<BR>cover as much as half of the budgets of their statewide public stations.<BR><BR>This suggests that it would be a long shot to replace
the annual $1.7<BR>million state subsidy. That money is used to maintain the state’s 41<BR>translator sites, which beam programming to 97 percent of the state. If<BR>the funding isn’t replaced, large swaths of rural areas will lose public<BR>television. Areas such as Coeur d’Alene could still pick up the KSPS<BR>signal out of Spokane, but Idaho-centric programming would be lost.<BR><BR>Pete Morrill, the head of IPTV, suggests that a market-based model would<BR>mean Southern Idaho’s Treasure Valley could probably sustain programming,<BR>but few other areas could.<BR><BR>So the question before the Legislature is actually more severe. Is the<BR>demise of Idaho Public Television in its current form worth it? We don’t<BR>think so, because programs such as “Legislature Live” and “Idaho Reports”<BR>keep the entire state up to date on the workings of public officials, and<BR>that access to government is crucial. In addition, rural areas would
lose<BR>valuable educational and cultural programming they can’t get anywhere<BR>else.<BR><BR>Of course, the value depends on whether one watches or not. Otter says he<BR>doesn’t. But many Idahoans do, as evidenced by the thousands of people who<BR>have joined a Facebook group in support of IPTV. An overflow crowd<BR>attended a hearing in Boise.<BR><BR>Otter’s plan to phase out funding over four years ignores some hidden<BR>costs. IPTV has spent $22 million for digital conversion over the past 10<BR>years, with $6 million from the feds with strings attached. If the station<BR>cannot maintain the equipment because of budget cuts, it would have to<BR>repay $1 million to $2 million.<BR><BR>We understand the difficult budget situation and the need to enact<BR>spending cuts. The station should certainly share in the pain. But too<BR>much would be lost by completely pulling the
plug.<BR><BR>----------------------------------------------------<BR><BR>Seeya round town, Moscow.<BR><BR>Tom Hansen<BR>Moscow, Idaho<BR><BR>"The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change<BR>and the Realist adjusts his sails."<BR><BR>- Unknown<BR><BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A> <BR> mailto:<A href="http://us.mc447.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table><br>